Corrupt cops

Almost no one would flinch if told that senior cops in Thailand are at the top of a corruption vacuum cleaner that sucks huge amounts of money to the top. The stories of police corruption have been especially numerous over the past couple of years. This is probably because the junta disrupted the system by tipping out those they identified as pro-Thaksin Shinawatra officers and because the palace has a serial police meddler in place.

Interestingly, The Nation has done a little research on the wealth of some recent top cops. The amounts of money they list are not at all surprising but their choice of cops to list is somewhat hit-and-miss,

They do mention the unabashedly corrupt former national police chief Pol Gen Somyos Pumpanmuang. PPT has had several posts over many years regarding his unexplained wealth.

It was back in 2014, following the appointment of scores of police and military to junta committees and other rubber stamp institutions, that a reader put together a list of unexplained wealth. That reader used official data.

Back then we observed:

The top money secretes to the top police. We acknowledge that there are a couple of low ranks listed, who probably report a rank having departed the cops early, but even so, the average for the top brass in the police is a whopping 258 million baht.

Nothing has probably changed, although we’d guess the top cops rake in more these days.

Deals continue to deliver

Thaksin Shinawatra’s deal to remake his position as one of that the establishment accepts has involved many betrayals and much bending and bowing.

His latest move is to close every Voice TV platform by the end of May 2024.

Credit: Khaosod

Voice TV was established in 2008 by Thaksin’s son, Panthongtae Shinawatra. It will lay off some 100 reporters and staff.

The network reportedly reached 22 million households through digital, satellite and cable TV, and “has long been known for its pro-Thaksin stance.” It was also a source of progressive programming for a number of years. “Talking Thailand” is one of the more progressive programs, which has recently become a toadying supporter of the Puea Thai coalition, ridding itself of several critical commentators. It explains the closure here:

“Station management” blamed economic losses for the closure, but we can’t help feeling that the ruling family no longer has a need for defending itself against the establishment it has (re)joined.

When the “management” implies that Voice TV is no longer needed as “there are many diverse media platforms and technologies that can carry on various social missions while democracy is taking root…”, they are kidding us all. What they mean is that Thaksin is back at the helm, albeit through proxies.

Whether this was a part of the deal done for Thaksin or the one being done for Yingluck remains an open question.

Much to lose, much to protect

VOA has an article reminding its readers of the popularity of Move Forward and the strength of the monarchy.

As it faces dissolution, as recent polls show, Move Forward and its leaders remain remarkably popular with the electorate. As Thaksin Shinawatra can attest, popularity is seen by the establishment as a threat to the existing order and, at its core, the monarchy.

As the article points out, this popularity derives from “a radical slate of reforms for equitable governance — to cut the military from power, break up an economic monopoly and amend the royal defamation law, known as lèse-majesté, which criminalizes criticism of the powerful monarchy.” In many places, such reforms would not be seen as “radical,” but this is royalist Thailand.

A Move Forward spokesperson stated the obvious: “We’ve seen party dissolution being used as one of the tools against parties that are opposite from the establishment institution of Thailand…”.

Clipped from Asia Democracy Chronicles

The article makes another obvious point:

Thailand’s monarchy is extremely powerful, and the royal defamation law protects it from criticism, with sentences of up to 15 years per conviction.

Dozens of young pro-democracy activists have been jailed in the last few years under the law.

That the monarchy remains powerful despite the youthful rebellion against it in 2020-21 demonstrates, for royalists, how important Article 112 is for maintaining the socio-economic and political order.

But does all of the establishment action against Move Forward suggest that the ruling class are in their death throes? Does party dissolution really “… make … no difference,” as legal academic Prinya Thaewanarumitkul says, arguing:

The coalition government will get slightly stronger [without an opposition]. But when it comes to the next election, there will be four million new voters. Without the appointed Senate, it’s highly likely that the MFP’s next version will be the government.

We can’t help wondering if the establishment doesn’t have a plan for that as well…. It has much to lose and much to protect.

Letters from prison

Clipped from a Reuters report

In Foreign Affairs, Andrew J. Nathan has a short review of Arnon Nampa’s Letters From Prison, volumes 1 and 2, which have been translated by The Article 112 Project and published by Justice in Translation:

The Thai lèse majesté law known as Article 112 has been applied with escalating severity in response to the growing resistance to the country’s ten-year-old military regime. The lawyer and human rights activist Arnon Nampa is serving two consecutive four-year terms for speech acts that ostensibly fall afoul of the law. With more cases against him still pending, he writes to his children, “Daddy’s . . . punishment might be imprisonment of more than 80 years.” Nonetheless, he tells them, “What Daddy is going through now is the process of being punished and accepting the punishment, but not accepting guilt.” On the contrary, “Going to prison this time is full of honor because it is part of the struggle for rights, freedom, and democracy.” He is terrified to think that his young son might not remember him. But at least, he hopes, his letters will help his two children learn about their father and understand why they cannot all be together. Meanwhile, his happiest moments are when he is asleep, dreaming of driving his daughter to school or bathing his son. The missives join a venerable tradition of prison letters that seek to influence events beyond the confining walls through their eloquence and humanity.

To assist readers in getting copies of these two volumes, we have uploaded them to PPT.

Thongchai on 112

It is not often that a critique of Article 112 appears in the local English-language press. Interestingly, The Nation has a story reporting Thongchai Winichakul’s comments at a recent online seminar held by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights.

An emeritus professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and an Octobrist, as PPT and many others have observed for years, there are “two legal principles operate in Thailand’s single legal system.”  He explained that:

“Royalist jurisprudence” replaces the normative rule of law in cases dealing with relations between the monarchy and the people….

Thailand’s justice system ”does not follow the normative principle and rule of law but has its own jurisprudence and legal system based on its own kind of rule by law…”.

He uses a definition of “normative jurisprudence” as “a set of moral and legal principles that come from a universal understanding of human nature or justice, rather than from laws made by specific governments.” He thinks that “Thailand’s lese majeste law … centred on the deep-rooted ‘Buddhist kingship notion’…”, where the “monarch … stands above the law and retains a position of revered worship…”.

The way this is reported, few ultra-royalists would disagree. (PPT did not participate in the seminar.) However, Thongchai goes further, arguing that “[Article] 112 is a form of blasphemy law like those used by other religious states because it’s based on radical fundamentalist Buddhist ideas…”.

He also observes “that Thai jurisprudence also normalises exceptions to normal criminal procedure by routinely denying bail release to citizens charged under Article 112.”

For PPT, this is the essence of double standards.

Thongchai fears “that if this trend continues, … Thailand would turn from a democratic system with the King as head of state into a semi-absolutist system.”

Arguably, that’s been the royalist plan since at least 1946.

Misinformation and the 2023 election

Clipped from UCF Today

Readers may find a recent report at Rappler of interest.  By Chanapat Komlongharn, “Misinformation, disinformation surrounded Thai 2023 election” is exactly what the title suggests.

Drawing on a report conducted by the data analytics company Rocket Media Lab, it is shown that the local social media landscape experienced a significant increase in “misinformation”during the 2023 election campaign.

According to the report, there were at least 70 instances of misinformation disseminated during the campaign and before the new government was in place.

Not surprisingly, “election winner Move Forward Party bore the brunt of these attacks, numbering about 24.”

 

Opposing militarism

Readers may be surprised to learn that one of the top-5 most read articles at The Guardian yesterday was on Thailand. “Thai conscientious objector risks jail in rare refusal of military service” is about Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal’s refusal to participate in the conscription ballot. The Guardian says this is “a rare protest as a conscientious objector.” It adds that if he is “prosecuted, it is believed he could become the first person in Thailand to be imprisoned for avoiding the draft through civil disobedience. The offence carries a maximum sentence of three years.”

Netiwit in 2017. Clipped from The Nation

Netiwit believes the system the military uses to get its “recruits” is “outdated, ineffective and unfairly affected the poorest, who were less well placed to find ways to avoid the draft.” Many conscripts end up as slave-like servants to senior officers and their families and firms.

The article points out that “research by Amnesty International found evidence that new conscripts face violence, humiliation and sexual assault…”.

Netiwit makes the important point that conscription is a “part of a wider system that undermined the country’s democracy.” He observed that military service “brainwashes people,”adding: “I think that military service is one thing that holds our country to be ruled by the military.”

The activist “first announced his objection to military service as a teenager, after the military seized power in a coup in 2014.”

Yachts, helicopters and warships

After the anti-monarchy rebellion at the beginning of the decade, the efforts of the royalist regime led by Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, now continued by the Puea Thai-led conservative coalition, appear to have “normalized” ridiculous royalism. Of course, ridiculous royalism fleeces taxpayers.

Ridiculous royalism is not only expensive, but attributes ridiculous attributes to royals. This can be seen in a   recent report at The Nation.

In this report, King Vajiralongkorn and Queen Suthida are reported to have been ferried to the Regent Cha Am Hotel “to preside over a sailing competition across the Gulf of Thailand in celebration of the King’s upcoming 72nd birthday…”.

Clipped from The Nation

This reporting is also a part of a long campaign to link the current king and queen to the legacy of the previous king, Bhumibol. The report trawls up old claims about the dead king as a great sailor. Over the past few months, there have been a few stories extolling Queen Suthida’s sudden emergence as a “skilled” and “winning” yacht sailor.

In this report, she is said to have crewed on a “THA72 sailboat in the IRC zero class, and emerged victorious.” Of course it did.

THA 72 is reported to be “a Sailing Vessel and is sailing under the flag of United Kingdom. Her length overall (LOA) is 15 meters and her width is 4 meters.” It is reportedly a family pro-am team, based in Southeast Asia. For an idea of the limited fields and the interlinked, almost incestuous, nature of the rich persons sport, see this Bangkok Post story from 2023.

This year’s “race started at Cha Am beach in Phetchaburi province and finished at Toey Ngam Beach in Sattahip district of Chonburi province, a distance of 45 nautical miles.” There were just eight teams.

It is reported that the king boarded the “HTMS Bhumibol Adulyadej ship to witness the race along the route off the coast of Phetchaburi to Chonburi province.” That’s a whole navy ship given over to the king for a morning out.

The “race” is “organised by the Royal Thai Navy and the Yacht Racing Association of Thailand…”.

In the afternoon, in Satthahip, the king and queen “visited the Royal Thai Marine Corps Monument in Sattahip district to take photographs with members of the Vayu team and sign their names in the visitor book.” A few hours later they “attended a ceremony at Royal Thai Marine Corps headquarters to present awards to winners of the race. Navy Commander-in-Chief Admiral Adung Phan-iam also presented a commemorative medal to the King.”

Among royalists, the idea that the king should “bestow… a trophy, modelled after the helm of King Bhumibol’s Vega boat, to Queen Suthida, who received it on behalf of the Vayu team” is not seen as in any way silly.

They were then loaded onto a helicopter to be ferried back to Bangkok.

Not a thought for cost. Limousines, luxury hotels, helicopters, yachts, banquets, thousands of personnel, and all paid for by the long suffering and long burdened taxpayer.

King’s company sanctioned

An AP report tells us that a “A Bangkok-based plastics firm has agreed to pay $20 million to settle with the U.S. over 467 ‘egregious’ violations of Iran sanctions, the U.S. Treasury announced on Friday.”

It states:

SCG Plastics Co. used U.S. banks to process $291 million in sales of Iranian high-density polyethylene resin from 2017 to 2018, according to the signed settlement agreement between the firm and Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control….

The resin, used for product bottles and industrial items, was manufactured by an Iranian joint venture owned in part, by SCG Plastics’ parent company, SCG Chemicals and the National Petrochemical Company of Iran, which is a government entity….

SCG Plastics is no longer in operation, a signed agreement between OFAC and the firm releases SGC Plastics from any liability related to the sanctions violations.

SCG Chemicals is part of the Siam Cement Group, where the king has a controlling stake.

Thaksin deal redux and double standards

While we don’t know the exact details of the palace/establishment deal done with Thaksin Shinawatra to get him back and to keep him out of prison, it does seem that another deal is being negotiated, quite publicly, for Yingluck Shinawatra’s return.

The public voice in this is lawyer and Shinawatra favorite Pichit Chuenban. Pichet is well known as a bagman for Thaksin:

He was sentenced to six months in prison while leading the defence team for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in June 2008. The Supreme Court held him and two legal representatives responsible for an apparent attempt to bribe the court.

Two million baht in cash was found wrapped in a paper bag in the court’s compound in early June 2008. Pichit claimed he thought it was a bag of snacks. He was seen handing the so-called “snack bag” to court clerks when Thaksin and his then-wife Potjaman Na Pombejra were due to appear in the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office.

Pichit is now an “adviser” to the prime minister.

He says: “There is nothing complicated about the [return] process… It will depend on [Yingluck] on when she decides to come home.” He then made the extraordinary claim that the deals done and being done “is not considered a double standard as it is done in accordance with the law.” He says: “We have adhered to the principles of law enforcement and justice process…”.

Like so many who are trained and work in the legal system, Pichit is unable comprehend the meaning of double standard. This is because double standards are simply normalized. The rich, the powerful, and the influential get wondrous interpretations of the law while the poor, ordinary, and, significantly, political opponents of the establishment get something else.

In other words, “principles of law enforcement and justice process” are constructed on double standards.